Adramalech warlock and the gate to hell

[Mrmt]

I wonder if anyone has tried the old gate to hell with the Adramlech warlock?

Seems that a fire attack against every non flying enemy creature in the game, plus wildfire imps, and the new synergies from Forged in Fire could be pretty fantastic.

It's still a huge cost - 24 mana - but it seems more viable now, especially against a swarm deck. (Of course to make it really good vs the druid, adding its attack to plant conjurations would be awesome and feel entirely thematic, but perhaps make warlock too strong against the druid.)

On an aside, can a demon summoned from a Pentagram also appear at the gate to hell?

[Elessar]

I had someone using the new warlock open the gate on me yesterday.  Didn't do much to my warlord (Elemental Cloak helps) but it did a number to my army.  And yes, the potential to burn so many creatures probably justifies the cost but only in similar circumstances (i.e., when used against non-burnproof, creature-heavy books). 

It takes a certain amount of planning and luck to use right.  My opponent dropped the gate and killed my soldier that was in the zone because he (rightly) anticipated that I'd try to Conquer it.  Next turn, he (with initiative) opened it with his first full action before I could get another soldier into position.  It was a well-executed play.

Regarding Pentagram - I don't think so.  I know the text of the card says "whenever you summon" as opposed to "whenever your Mage summons," but the official codex supplement doesn't address it and I feel like they would have issued an errata (like they did for Garrison Post) if they intended for Gate to Hell to work in a similar fashion. 

[Mrmt]

  I know the text of the card says "whenever you summon" as opposed to "whenever your Mage summons," but the official codex supplement doesn't address it and I feel like they would have issued an errata (like they did for Garrison Post) if they intended for Gate to Hell to work in a similar fashion.

Hmm. Curiously, your reasoning makes me more inclined to think it is in fact ok.
It does indeed say when 'you' summon... Which differentiates from 'your mage'.
I'm going to assume this is ok... Just my interpretation though.
I suspect it's a moot point as I'm unlikely to use it!

[Elessar]

Fair enough.  The wording could certainly be clearer. 

[Wildhorn]

  I know the text of the card says "whenever you summon" as opposed to "whenever your Mage summons," but the official codex supplement doesn't address it and I feel like they would have issued an errata (like they did for Garrison Post) if they intended for Gate to Hell to work in a similar fashion.

Hmm. Curiously, your reasoning makes me more inclined to think it is in fact ok.
It does indeed say when 'you' summon... Which differentiates from 'your mage'.
I'm going to assume this is ok... Just my interpretation though.
I suspect it's a moot point as I'm unlikely to use it!

You will never see "your mage". It is always refer as "you" because you are the mage.

[jacksmack]

my enchanters ring mentions 'mage'.

[Wildhorn]

my enchanters ring mentions 'mage'.

Interesting. I checked equioments and while most use "Mage" instead of "you", there is some ezception like the druid and necro staves. What is weird is that the BM staff use "Mage" while providig similar effect of necro staff. Would have been nice some consistency among cards regarding Mage/You words.

But anyway, if you check the General Signet, it is clear Gate to Hell only works for the mage.

[Mrmt]

if you check the General Signet, it is clear Gate to Hell only works for the mage.

Why?

[barriecritzer]

I tried it the gate to hell is so worthless great concept but a bad card

[Elessar]

I wouldn't say worthless, but its value is highly situational.  I'd definitely say that it's only worth consideration in the hands of the female warlock.   The card could probably use some tweaking, but I don't know what that would be. 

[Battlehamster]

I tried it the gate to hell is so worthless great concept but a bad card

Agreed Barrie, just too expensive (both mana and points wise) for basically a +1 to demons (which the helmet does that for me and cheaper). I really don't see myself using that AOE (why not just use a real fire spell like ring of fire that I can target with?). I just can't justfy the cost for my Warlockess.

[Wildhorn]

I tried it the gate to hell is so worthless great concept but a bad card

Agreed Barrie, just too expensive (both mana and points wise) for basically a +1 to demons (which the helmet does that for me and cheaper). I really don't see myself using that AOE (why not just use a real fire spell like ring of fire that I can target with?). I just can't justfy the cost for my Warlockess.

First, Gate to Hell is not too expensive.

Mana wise, point wise and effect wise, it is the equivalent of a Garrison Post (pre-errata) + Rajan's Fury (better than it in fact since +1 melee > +1 piercing) + 2 Flameblast.

So if you hit more than 2 creatures with it it get even cheaper.

The only thing this card need is an errata like Garrison to allow spawnpoints to summon onto it.

[blackirishguilt]

I tried it the gate to hell is so worthless great concept but a bad card

Agreed Barrie, just too expensive (both mana and points wise) for basically a +1 to demons (which the helmet does that for me and cheaper). I really don't see myself using that AOE (why not just use a real fire spell like ring of fire that I can target with?). I just can't justfy the cost for my Warlockess.

First, Gate to Hell is not too expensive.

Mana wise, point wise and effect wise, it is the equivalent of a Garrison Post (pre-errata) + Rajan's Fury (better than it in fact since +1 melee > +1 piercing) + 2 Flameblast.

So if you hit more than 2 creatures with it it get even cheaper.

The only thing this card need is an errata like Garrison to allow spawnpoints to summon onto it.

+1 to this.  Awesome suggestion about the spawnpoints, though without testing I'm not sure if that would make it right or too good.  Still, interesting proposition.

[BoomFrog]

It would not be too good...  The above calculation ignores the very real cost of two full actions.  By the time you are wanting to "open the gate" you are likely to be in melee combat which means you are giving up at least one, maybe two attacks.  Since it's probably mid to late game that is probably a pretty strong attack, lets assume it's at least as good as a flame blast.  And don't forget the gate hits yourself as well so even assuming you have good fire resist you still need to be hitting at least 4 more of your opponents creatures then your own.  And it doesn't even work against flyers when anti falcon swarm would be one of it's best uses otherwise.

Also, a swarm strategy which benefits from the +1 melee and summoning flexibility are the exact opposite of a strategy that wants to spend mana on a big AoE attack.  It's diverse effects are inherently dis-synergistic with itself and if you are paying full price for all those things it is never be an effective card.

[magerunner]

Actually, I look at it as a sturdy way to get +1 melee to all my demons.  Ignoring the attack action.  With 1-2 creatures it is meh.  Going to 3-8+ creatures and you are getting into some really powerful effects.  Cost wise though it is still rough.  Situational, bit could have impressive synergy like say getting Wildfire Imps to 6 dice.  That is nothing to sneeze at.